On the Saturday Night Boxing
Facebook page, I get asked some great questions from boxing fans from
around the world (I also get asked all sorts of silly, but you know how that
can be). Many of the questions can be answered with a pithy comment or a brief
sentence, but often I get some good ones, those that I would like to explore in
more detail. Thus, here is the initial Saturday Night Boxing Mailbag. Below are
all questions from real boxing fans. I have included their names and hometowns.
You'll
see a nice variety of questions dealing with the top boxing topics of the day,
such as HBO, Stevenson, Mayweather and Haymon, as well as some excellent
questions about other goings-on in the sport.
HBO/Stevenson
With
the announcement that Adonis Stevenson will be fighting on Showtime instead of
HBO, it leads that Stevenson will fight the winner of Hopkins-Shumenov instead
of Kovalev. In terms of his career and legacy, does Stevenson's stock drop
because of this?
Eddie
LaRonin
Toronto
Well,
avoiding Kovalev doesn't help Stevenson's legacy; that's certain. However, if
he keeps winning and beats Hopkins and some other good fighters at light
heavyweight, the impact of avoiding Kovalev can be diminished over time. It's
true that skipping over a natural rival will be a significant mark against him
but time does heal many wounds. Right now, Stevenson's reputation has taken a
hit, but more wins against good opposition will help his legacy in the long
run.
Is HBO
getting out of the boxing business?
Damaya
Gabar
Denver
I have
been assured by people at HBO that they remain in the boxing business and that
they are as committed to it as they have always been (of course, one must be
wary of corporate spin). But it's true that HBO's schedule has been subpar in
2014 and the move to push more fights to pay per view isn't welcome
news for its subscribers.
I don't
believe that HBO can continue to conduct business as it currently does. By
avoiding Al Haymon and Golden Boy fighters, the network is clearly cutting
itself off from many potential thrilling matchups for its subscribers. I don't
believe that this is a recipe for long-term success. Last month, I wrote a
piece about the state of HBO Boxing. Take
a look at it here for some
additional thoughts on the subject.
Mayweather
Is
there anyone in history that could beat Floyd over 12 rounds?
Alan
Butler
Glasgow,
Scotland
Sure,
lots of fighters would have a real chance of beating him. Over the last 40
years, I'll give you some who could win (not necessarily saying that they
would). All fought in his weight classes: Roberto Duran, Sugar Ray Leonard,
Tommy Hearns, Aaron Pryor, Julio Cesar Chavez, Terry Norris, Mike McCallum,
Julian Jackson, Winky Wright, Vernon Forrest, Manny Pacquiao and Sergio
Martinez. I'm sure that there are a few others as well.
Will
Mayweather ever lose?
Gerardo
Andrades
National
City, California
If he
sticks around long enough, it's certainly possible. Probable, I would say.
What do
you think about the delusional fans that think Mayweather just runs in his
fights?
James
Riordan
Dublin,
Ireland
They
are severely misguided and not watching his fights that closely. Mayweather is
a very good inside fighter and although he still moves quite a bit, he spends a
lot of his time beating his opponents in the pocket.
What is
the strategy to beat Mayweather?
Steven
McManus
Syracuse,
New York
In
theory, there are many ways to beat Mayweather. No fighter is invincible. Jose Luis Castillo demonstrated that he could be susceptible to pressure. Mosley and
Judah showed that his chin could be cracked. De la Hoya had a lot of success
with an excellent jab.
However,
to beat Mayweather a fighter needs to adapt and show different dimensions.
Floyd will often give up early rounds while he figures a fighter out. But by
round three or four, he has already seen his opponents' strategies and how they
plan to beat him. He rarely loses rounds in the second halves of his fights.
Fighters
would have to show Floyd different looks over 12 rounds to beat him. Also, it
would be helpful to have a large arsenal of punches. Perhaps Leonard's
combination of finesse and power or Duran's pressure and heavy hands could do
the trick. I'll make a possible
exception for Julian Jackson, who had the capability to knock out any fighter
in history at 154 pounds. Perhaps with one good connect, he ends it. For those
without true one-punch knockout power, to beat Mayweather, a fighter has
to make adjustments.
How do
you feel about a Bradley/Mayweather showdown if Timmy beats Manny?
Za-Quan
Peterkin
St.
Albans, New York
It's
obviously a great fight although it looks unlikely now that Bradley has renewed
with Top Rank. But putting that aside and just examining the hypothetical
aspects of the fight, Bradley is a boxer who brings many dimensions to the
table. He can pressure, fight off of his back foot, use lateral movement and
lead or counter.
The
issue for Bradley against Mayweather is that his defense, while good, is
certainly not impenetrable. He can be hit and he sometimes can get too brave
for his own good. I think that Floyd would have success on the inside and his
jab and straight right hand would land a lot at mid-range. Bradley would need
to outwork Mayweather decisively to win on the judges' scorecards but that's
not an easy proposition since Floyd doesn't really allow for high volumes. I
think it's a competitive fight and it would go the distance, but I would favor
Floyd.
Haymon
What's
happening in boxing with Al Haymon?
Grant
Cartwright
Wilmington,
Delaware
You
mean it's still called boxing and not Haymon?
Do you
believe that Al Haymon is good for the sport of boxing?
Itch
Edinburgh,
Scotland
All
joking aside, I think that Al Haymon, much like boxing titans Bob Arum and Don
King, has a very mixed legacy in the sport. On one hand, he certainly gets his
fighters paid. He has been very adept at guiding young talent to the
championship level of the sport.
However,
I don't believe that he has done a great job in helping develop his fighters to
reach their full potential. Not all of this blame should be assigned to Haymon
but I think that he plays a role. Look at Jermain Taylor, Andre Berto, Paul
Williams and Adrien Broner. I think that all of these boxers were rushed and
didn't face enough real challenges during their developmental fights. Haymon
tried to fast-track these fighters to greatness and, I believe, short-circuited
their ultimate abilities. I think that this is a major mark against him.
I also
don't like the way that certain fighters in his stable become favored over
others who may be more deserving. Erislandy Lara and Keith Thurman are two
boxers whom I believe have deserved better treatment than they have received
from Haymon.
Since
2013, Haymon has realized that by allowing his fighters to face each other he
could expand their options in the ring (as well as his cut of the action). This has
helped create opportunities for his fighters but I now feel that he has gone
too far in the other direction by keeping as much as he possibly can in-house.
This is a limiting factor for his stable.
As far
as his relationships with certain networks and promoters, there have always
been very influential managers in boxing. If he's a tough negotiator, then so
be it. All he needs is one network to say yes to him. To this point,
he has always found that willing suitor.
Potpourri
What is
happening with Andre Dirrell?
Junaid
Khalil
Manchester,
England
Not
much. Chillin'.
Does
timing truly beat speed? I believe it does.
David
Byrne
Dublin,
Ireland
Ahhh.
One of my pet peeves – boxing clichés. There is almost a rock-paper-scissors
notion in boxing that speed beats power and timing beats speed, etc. All of
these concepts can be true, but none should be taken as some type of immutable
fact. There are dozens and dozens of counterexamples every year. Let's take
Khan-Molina and Marquez-Bradley as two instances where the "timing beats
speed" cliché didn't work. Both Molina and Marquez were able to land with
their counters at various points in their fight, yet the faster guys won.
Ultimately, timing is great, but if it can't thwart or dissuade the other
fighter, than it doesn't guarantee anything.
Now,
speed beats power. Except when it doesn't. Chad Dawson certainly had faster
hands than Adonis Stevenson. But that didn't matter when he got cracked in the
chin so hard that he couldn't make it out of the first round. Let's stay with
Dawson for a second. Everyone would agree that Hopkins is a master of timing,
yet Dawson outboxed him fairly easily, another example where timing didn't beat
speed.
So
these clichés like "speed kills" and "skills pay the
bills," are all cute and everything but they are far from definitive
truths. It's like "styles makes fights." Sometimes that's true. But
sometimes the more talented fighter beats all styles. Ultimately, I'm a sucker
for talent. That's something I continue to believe in, not clichés.
Who do
you feel is the most underappreciated heavyweight champion of all time? I feel
like Larry Holmes is often overlooked in that category.
Ryan
Uglow
Scottsbluff,
Nebraska
Certainly
in his time Holmes, just like Lennox Lewis, wasn't fully appreciated by the
boxing public. However, both of these fighters have aged well historically and
are considered top-ten heavyweights. Thus, I don't believe either is a
candidate for being truly underappreciated.
I'll
give you Gene Tunney as an answer. With multiple wins over Harry Greb (a much
smaller fighter, but one of the best pugilists of all time) and Jack Dempsey
(granted an older version), Tunney was certainly an elite talent. While many
hardcore boxing fans and historians know about Tunney's skills and
accomplishments, I believe that time has forgotten him somewhat. People talk
about Jack Johnson, Jack Dempsey and Joe Louis during the first half of the
20th century; Tunney isn't brought up that regularly. I'm not saying that
Tunney was Joe Louis' equal, but he was an excellent fighter and probably
deserves a more elevated spot in heavyweight history as compared to his current
standing.
If Bob
Arum's going to just continue to disrespect Rigo and hates his style of
fighting, why not sell him to the highest bidder and stop sitting him on the
shelf. Real boxing fans wants to see him in action, and often.
Malachi
Walker
Hudson,
New York
I agree
with part of this. Certainly Arum has done a poor job of promoting Rigondeaux
by badmouthing him to the press and publicly announcing HBO's purported
displeasure with the fighter. However, Rigo hasn't connected with fans. His
ratings aren't particularly strong. His style of fighting often lacks action
and he hasn't shown an interest in staying busy. Both sides are to blame here
and I'm sure that after his next fight, when Rigo is a free agent, Arum will
gladly let him walk.
Do you
think taking a loss and getting paid millions to do it is worth it?
Andres
Olaechea
Ponce,
Puerto Rico
This
situation in boxing doesn't happen nearly as often as we think it does. Brandon
Rios was in such a situation last year against Manny Pacquiao, when he walked
into a fight lacking every conceivable advantage. He took quite a beating too.
Larry Holmes was fat and out-of-shape when he was offered a fight against Mike
Tyson. Holmes was happy to take the money.
It may
depend on where a fighter is in his career. If a boxer is on the rise, a
brutalizing loss could stunt his development, shake his confidence and cause
serious injury. For other fighters, the money is more important than whatever the
result is. I don't have a hard-and-fast answer to your question and I think
that each situation should be evaluated individually.
Do you
think boxing is better since the Eastern European fighters have started to
compete on the professional level?
Joseph
Higgins
Atlantic
City
Of
course. The sport is always better with more talent. In just two short decades,
Eastern Europe, Russia and the former Soviet republics have produced many
champions and contenders. In addition, if you add in the Cuban fighters that
have made their way to professional boxing in the past 10 years, you have a new
era of talent. The Klitschkos will both get into the Hall of Fame (Wlad more
deserving than Vitali). Rigondeaux has Hall of Fame talent. Joel Casamayor is
probably a borderline candidate who falls just short.
Ex-Communist
countries have also produced long-time champions such as Marco Huck (Serbia,
formerly part of Yugoslavia) and Arthur Abraham (Armenia). In addition,
consider prime talents such as Gennady Golovkin, Sergey Kovalev, Ruslan Provodnikov,
Alexander Povetkin, Vasyl Lomachenko, Yoan Pablo Hernandez, Erislandy
Lara, Yuriorkis Gamboa and Mike Perez.
I think
in time we will look upon professional fighters from prior to the fall of the
Berlin Wall with an internal asterisk, like we do with white baseball players
before integration. Professional fighters from the 20th century will be seen as
having faced lesser competition than those in the 21st century. I'm sure that
not everyone shares this opinion and there are mitigating factors to it, such
as America was producing more boxing talent in the 20th century than it is
right now. But let's wait on judging that one; we're only 15 years into the new
century. America has a chance to right its ship.
We are
still at the end of the first wave of the ex-Communist fighters joining the
professional ranks. In another 20 or 30 years, I expect many boxers from
ex-Communist or current Communist nations – let’s not forget the influx of
Chinese fighters that will be coming to the sport – to dominate. I believe that
boxing historians will eventually look at the 20th century as a time when
fighters from Western nations reigned supreme, but that they faced a
significantly reduced talent pool. As an example, Muhammad
Ali will always be remembered as one of the truly great heavyweights, but we
really don't know if he was better than the Cuban star Teofilo Stevenson, who
never got to fight professionally.
Right
now, boxing history is still Western-centric, by that I mean it is controlled
and written by Western writers (include Western-style democracies like Japan
and Australia into this mix). Ultimately, needed revisionism will take
place in boxing history. I believe that the Communist amateur stars of the 20th
century will eventually earn their rightful place in boxing history and that
the accomplishments of 20th century boxers will be slightly diminished because
of the relatively small number of nations that supplied top professional
boxers.
What
does Andre Ward need to do to be a mainstream athlete, mainstream like LeBron,
Brady, Crosby, or GSP (George St-Pierre)?
Paul
Swacha
Calgary,
Canada
I'm not
sure that Ward will ever get to that lofty status. (Also, I don't know if GSP
should be included there. I'm rather ignorant to the MMA's effect on
broader popular culture). First off, Ward could certainly fight more. His most
recent battles have been against his promoter and not in the ring. It would
also help if he had a natural rival. Unfortunately, his fights have
been so easy that it has been tough for him to provide compelling action in
the ring. Maybe Golovkin or Kovalev are the type of fighters who could really
push Ward, but who knows? To become a bigger attraction in the broader sports
world, Ward will need suitable dance partners that the public views as having a
legitimate chance to beat him. Right now, these candidates are few and far
between.
Will
Kell Brook win a world title?
Daniel
Blaides
Whitechurch,
Ireland
I don't
see why not in today's world of four titles per division, especially if he
doesn't eat his way out of welterweight. Fighting in an actual title match
would also greatly enhance his chances of, you know, winning a title. I think
he's been a mandatory since Clinton was President.
Why do
we boxing fans continue to watch matches when typical matches are pretty boring?
Graciano
Iracheta
San
Antonio
Two
answers: 1. We’re masochists. We enjoy subjecting ourselves to awful fights. We
watch fights knowing that they will be bad and uncompetitive yet we often do
this several times a month. 2. We never know when a Bradley-Provodnikov can
happen. We'd hate to miss it.
Is
Broner a hype job?
Phillip
Inno
I
wouldn't say hype job. He has legitimate wins in my eyes over Antonio DeMarco
and Paulie Malignaggi; they are certainly capable fighters. Ultimately, I
believe that there were failures all throughout Team Broner. He needed to go to 140 before 147. He should have had more
developmental fights before taking on someone like Daniel Ponce de Leon. He
needed additional live threats at 130 and 135. In the rush to make Broner a
star, the fighter, his promoter and management all jumped the gun.
In
addition, he needed to be in the gym more. He went to 147 partly out of a lack
of discipline during times when he wasn't in camp. His inside fighting skills
weren't nearly as effective at 147 as they were at the smaller weights because
he lacked true welterweight power.
Broner
needs to go back down to 140 and string together three good wins. I'd like to
see him be fairly active in the ring. He should be facing if not necessarily
world beaters then at least live threats – Carlos Molina is a time-waster. He
wasn't ready for the power and pressure of Maidana, but he wasn't all that far
off either. One day I'd like to see him against Matthysse. But let's not rush
him. He still needs some time.
What's
next for Danny Garcia?
Levi
Giles
Grimsby,
England
It
seems that Garcia is ready to move up to 147. I think a natural first opponent
would be Robert Guerrero, who has enough strengths and flaws to make for a very
competitive and compelling fight. Golden Boy is very deep at 147. Fights
against the winner or loser of Porter-Malignaggi could make sense for Garcia as
well.
Will
beating Miguel Cotto make Sergio Martinez a Hall of Famer?
Oscar
Torres
Victoria,
Texas
I
believe so. It is a watered-down era but Sergio has
provided a lot of thrilling moments in the ring. The media also likes him. A
win over Cotto would make seven defenses of his lineal middleweight title. In
addition, at his time at the top of the sport, no one has been able to beat him
definitively. I don't believe that Martinez is an inner-ring Hall of Fame type,
reserved for the truly transcendent in the sport, but I think he gets in.
Why is
the boxing world so corrupt?
Julio
Andino
Baker
City, Oregon
Is it
boxing or the world in which we live? Is boxing just a mirror for the base
instincts of humanity? It's not like there isn't corruption in all other forms
of sport, industry and politics. Nevertheless, it does seem like boxing fans,
as opposed to enthusiasts from other sports, are particularly fixated on the
corrupt aspects of their sport.
If you
could make one change to the sport what would it be?
Jay
Martin
Boxing
has many problems; there's no need to sugarcoat it. I think the most
damning one is the best not fighting the best. There have always been fighters
who have ducked other guys. That's not new. However, the sport is structurally
set up today in the U.S., U.K., Germany and Japan in norms where the rival
promotional interests (with tacit approval from their sponsoring television
networks) rarely match their fighters against those of their competitors. This
is a huge problem. Even if a Golden Boy fighter wanted to face a Top Rank
boxer, the current boxing landscape makes that reality almost impossible.
The
lack of elite matchups harms the sport and ruins its ability to help create new
fans and keep its existing ones. It's very frustrating to sit through an era
where the top two fighters in the world have refused to face each other. But I
don't think Mayweather-Pacquiao is an aberration. I believe that the failure to
make that fight reflects the current norm in the sport. We are seeing this
throughout boxing where the best fighters find all sorts of ways to avoid
facing their top rivals. If the
best fights the best, the sport's problems won't magically disappear, but we'll
certainly be much happier, and boxing will be in a far better place.
Adam Abramowitz is the head writer and founder of saturdaynightboxing.com.
He is also a member of the Transnational Boxing Rankings Board.
Contact Adam at saturdaynightboxing@hotmail.com
@snboxing on twitter
Follow Saturday Night Boxing on Facebook:
Contact Adam at saturdaynightboxing@hotmail.com
@snboxing on twitter
Follow Saturday Night Boxing on Facebook:
No comments:
Post a Comment